Posts

Auckland, New Zealand – ACX Meetups Everywhere 2021 2021-08-23T08:49:53.187Z
Thinking of our epistemically troubled friend 2021-08-17T10:33:28.214Z
Continuous Minority Elimination 2021-07-29T09:29:05.182Z
We should probably buy ADA? 2021-05-24T23:58:05.395Z
Deepmind has made a general inductor ("Making sense of sensory input") 2021-02-02T02:54:26.404Z
In software engineering, what are the upper limits of Language-Based Security? 2020-12-27T05:50:46.772Z
The Fermi Paradox has not been dissolved - James Fodor 2020-12-12T23:18:32.081Z
Propinquity Cities So Far 2020-11-16T23:12:52.065Z
Shouldn't there be a Chinese translation of Human Compatible? 2020-10-09T08:47:55.760Z
Should some variant of longtermism identify as a religion? 2020-09-11T05:02:43.740Z
Design thoughts for building a better kind of social space with many webs of trust 2020-09-06T02:08:54.766Z
Investment is a useful societal mechanism for getting new things made. Stock trading shares some functionality with investment, but seems very very inefficient, at that? 2020-08-24T01:18:19.808Z
misc raw responses to a tract of Critical Rationalism 2020-08-14T11:53:10.634Z
A speculative incentive design: self-determined price commitments as a way of averting monopoly 2020-04-28T07:44:52.440Z
MakoYass's Shortform 2020-04-19T00:12:46.448Z
Being right isn't enough. Confidence is very important. 2020-04-07T01:10:52.517Z
Thoughts about Dr Stone and Mythology 2020-02-25T01:51:29.519Z
When would an agent do something different as a result of believing the many worlds theory? 2019-12-15T01:02:40.952Z
What do the Charter Cities Institute likely mean when they refer to long term problems with the use of eminent domain? 2019-12-08T00:53:44.933Z
Mako's Notes from Skeptoid's 13 Hour 13th Birthday Stream 2019-10-06T09:43:32.464Z
The Transparent Society: A radical transformation that we should probably undergo 2019-09-03T02:27:21.498Z
Lana Wachowski is doing a new Matrix movie 2019-08-21T00:47:40.521Z
Prokaryote Multiverse. An argument that potential simulators do not have significantly more complex physics than ours 2019-08-18T04:22:53.879Z
Can we really prevent all warming for less than 10B$ with the mostly side-effect free geoengineering technique of Marine Cloud Brightening? 2019-08-05T00:12:14.630Z
Will autonomous cars be more economical/efficient as shared urban transit than busses or trains, and by how much? What's some good research on this? 2019-07-31T00:16:59.415Z
If I knew how to make an omohundru optimizer, would I be able to do anything good with that knowledge? 2019-07-12T01:40:48.999Z
In physical eschatology, is Aestivation a sound strategy? 2019-06-17T07:27:31.527Z
Scrying for outcomes where the problem of deepfakes has been solved 2019-04-15T04:45:18.558Z
I found a wild explanation for two big anomalies in metaphysics then became very doubtful of it 2019-04-01T03:19:44.080Z
Is there a.. more exact.. way of scoring a predictor's calibration? 2019-01-16T08:19:15.744Z
The Mirror Chamber: A short story exploring the anthropic measure function and why it can matter 2019-01-11T22:26:29.887Z
The end of public transportation. The future of public transportation. 2018-02-09T21:51:16.080Z
Principia Compat. The potential Importance of Multiverse Theory 2016-02-02T04:22:06.876Z

Comments

Comment by MakoYass on Thinking of our epistemically troubled friend · 2021-08-18T04:17:22.227Z · LW · GW

The feeling is misplaced. Information is intentionally being withheld to protect the privacy of our friend. The story only represents my perspective, after having paid only a limited amount of attention to things, and I would discourage anyone close to the situation from taking my characterization of it as conclusive.

Comment by MakoYass on Thinking of our epistemically troubled friend · 2021-08-18T01:43:36.720Z · LW · GW

Is there a test we could do that would convince me you're right or convince you I'm right depending on how the test turned out?

We did get to a point where we wanted them to take literally any formal bet to demonstrate that they even believe the things they are saying and that there is a real object-level disagreement, and they wouldn't, anticipating malicious fuckerry no matter the terms. That was where I broke off. I suppose, maybe that was one important piece of rationalist culture they did not have. Uncooperative in engaging the disagreement in a respectful, grounded way.

I suppose it would be more suitable if instead of wagering money we wagered duties, as wagering money isn't really appropriate between friends, and probably makes them feel insecure.
Something like "If your surface reading of this claim turns out to be wrong after it has been more deeply investigated, then you must investigate three more claims. And if two of those are wrong, you must investigate 5 more" or something like that. "If you are right, then we must listen to more of your shit (if you refuse to bet, then some of us definitely aren't listening to more of your shit)"

Comment by MakoYass on Thinking of our epistemically troubled friend · 2021-08-18T01:16:51.638Z · LW · GW

Update: The goblin sack weighs in:

█████ has safety and socio██████ needs that aren't being fully met

needs to feel safe and so on and no rhetoric will change those emotions before or without situations changing

the more times you run a convincing proof against someone who can't emotionally accept it, the more you blunt the convincing proof on them

If I were snarky, I would respond that they find themselves in a state of psychological unsafety because they keep taking hubristic bets and pushing their friends away, regardless, it is still ultimately our problem to solve.

Another adds

so [mako's] post is implying that [rationalists] should be able to maslow people lmao

I do totally buy this. "Maslowing" is a term that arose at some point to mean: ensuring that enough of a person's basic selfish needs are met, that they can begin to think of other people, the rest of the world, or of loftier needs like self-actualization.

I resolve, this task of providing enough psychological safety to allow a person to admit when they were deeply, haplessly wrong (dependent on others for guidance and correction! How horrifying!), is a rationality technique, perhaps the most important rationality technique.

I find that narcissism is our most common adversary, especially in hyperpublic contexts like the global online discourse where narcissism is hard as fuck to resist, and runs in the water.

Narcissism is exactly a felt need to defend a delusional narrative of perfection.

It is a product of social incentives.

We will improve the incentives.

Comment by MakoYass on Thinking of our epistemically troubled friend · 2021-08-18T00:52:59.422Z · LW · GW

Neither of these things, I must ask for your forbearance, it isn't time to spell out the acronym yet, we are working hard every day to deliver the announcement to you soon 🙇🙇

"goblins" is a term of endearment that captures the spirit of unrefined, occasionally ugly anarchic creativity of the room.

Comment by MakoYass on "If and Only If" Should Be Spelled "Ifeff" · 2021-07-19T03:03:53.520Z · LW · GW

If you actually succeeded and everyone started writing "ifeff" the etymology would no longer point to a logical story.

"Ifof" seems better to me. It more resembles "If and only if" which would make it easier to learn.

Comment by MakoYass on The Point of Trade · 2021-06-28T10:28:06.428Z · LW · GW

Specialization. Yes. I've been making an induction puzzle game over the past couple of years. It takes place largely on the workbench of a reverseng (derivation: Reverse Engineer) employed by a drone factory that is situated in a late industrial society (a few years after creating misaligned AGI, so hardened by its state of biological warfare that it will last a few years yet).

One of the organizing principles that has allowed your world to run so terrifically fast is "Specialism", which holds that a person's profession should cast a long shadow over their entire lives. Most of us are edited straight from the germline, and then we begin our training at birth. The notion that a person would choose their specialization is mostly extinct, and discussed rarely, when it is discussed, it is depicted fantasistically, a little bit like love marriages in India. They happen, they're normal in many elite subcultures, but most of us know why they wouldn't be right for us.

Your training presents you with narratives, the narratives frame your specialization (spec) as the backbone of history, the girthiest load-bearing column, holding up the weight of the whole world. As a child, your media diet is well controlled, as it must be, and by your teen years, the media of other specs, of the same age group, will have grown incomprehensible or uninteresting to you, as if it were written in a different language, for a different belief system, dressed with an alien's sense of beauty. When you enter the workplace, you will have to interact harmoniously with these aliens. Learning to admire them is the final part of your training. It wont be easy. They are deeply unlike you, and even though you are each proud of your spec, you need each other, they can do things you never could, you will love them for their difference.

There will be partings in these black thickets, glimpses out into a calmer world, a world that is doing a lot more rumination, and a lot less hurtling. This other world may, or may not survive these glimpses from our creatures of the black thickets. That will be up to you.

I don't think the world belonging to Specialism is a good one. Everything moves too fast here. Philosophers, anthropologists, sociologists, have none of their hands on any of its reigns, instead, market forces looking for 20 years returns, its homesteads pumping out specials like puppies from a mill.
But I can't help but internalize Specialism, a little bit. It is practical. I am finite. I can only be a few types of thing, I can only make a few humble contributions to the global product. Better I approach them with absolute devotion. As a forecaster I'm permitted the relief of looking out over the needs of the future and figure out where I'd fit into them. I get to figure out what I ought to be before becoming it. Most people don't have that. It would be nice if there were some higher civic process that could give this clarity to everyone. It would have been nice if it could have given some clarity to me back when I was wandering deserts.

Comment by MakoYass on Non-poisonous cake: anthropic updates are normal · 2021-06-24T04:03:31.656Z · LW · GW

That's the great thing about roam pages, you don't have to publish. Draft forever. For instance, here's a draft applying my conception of anthropics to fish. It's not finished and maybe it never will be but at least it's recorded and I can show it to people.

x] I actually didn't mean that. The concern is that if this is a simulation, it's unlikely that whales are simulated with much detail, as they don't have much of an effect on the most probably-interesting-to-simulators aspects of this era. Which I really should have mentioned because that's one of the branches of the prediction: If we look closely at some whale brains and find that they ought to be huge anthropic measure attractors, there is a way that the underlying theory could still be probable.

I suppose the reason I didn't mention it is that, if it's a simulation thing, we have no way of demonstrating that until it's too late to do anything with that information, and I'm not sure anything good would come of me writing about it any time soon because simulationism is a big pill that most people aren't eager to swallow.

Comment by MakoYass on Non-poisonous cake: anthropic updates are normal · 2021-06-23T00:12:07.573Z · LW · GW

in the absence of exact duplicates

Have you come across examples of it getting weird around exact duplicates? I should probably be informed of them. The only one example I'm aware of is the one I found https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/9RdhJKPrYvsttsko9/the-mirror-chamber-a-short-story-exploring-the-anthropic

Comment by MakoYass on Non-poisonous cake: anthropic updates are normal · 2021-06-23T00:07:08.216Z · LW · GW

Are you keeping a list somewhere we can look? A roam page, maybe?

For now nothing comes to mind, but I can register a prediction of my own. I've been developing a theory of experience as an emergent property of matter. I'm not sure of it. One of its big tensions is, it finds it strange that we are not whales. Whales seem to have more of the physical qualities that make human brains cosmically peculiar than human brains do. Assuming that whales actually exist, it would hold that most observer-moments experiences ought to belong to whales. The main alternative is:

Prediction: Whale brains must be missing some amount of nth-degree connectivity in some way.

Right now the only scrapings of anything like confirmation I've stumbled over as a non marine neurologist is that their cortex is missing layer four.

Comment by MakoYass on Taboo "Outside View" · 2021-06-19T09:35:47.671Z · LW · GW

It should be mentioned that Eliezer's last (known) big release Inadequate Equilibria was pretty much a correction of pathological outside-viewing. The thrust can be summed up as "sometimes you can't beat the market, sometimes you can, it's important to know which situation you're in instead of just pathetically assuming the former all of the time."

Comment by MakoYass on Mati_Roy's Shortform · 2021-06-13T05:59:21.717Z · LW · GW

Are you actually looking for the "watch later" feature..

Comment by MakoYass on Reply to Nate Soares on Dolphins · 2021-06-11T12:01:05.876Z · LW · GW

I noticed the subtle background forces that whisper (at least to blue tribe members in their youth) "phylogenetic classification is the one true way to organize life forms", and rejected its claim.

I still can't guess why that bothers you :/ When I try to imagine the motivations of this shadowy conspiracy of elites who quietly manipulated the anglosphere into always maintaining separate concepts for fish and cetaceans, I just see a desire to teach us about how special and cool cetaceans are.

Comment by MakoYass on When would an agent do something different as a result of believing the many worlds theory? · 2021-06-08T02:02:56.250Z · LW · GW

Another point is that most people strongly value existence/non-existence additionally to the quality and 'probability' of existence

Mm, agreed. We're fans of quantities, rather than qualities, so I may have been underrecognizing this.

Humans clearly have special concerns about not existing at all, that extend beyond the linear concern for merely existing less. A quantum multiverse (or maybe even just a physically large multiverse, with chance recurrences) would soundly and naturally decrease a human's aversion to death, to some extent.

Comment by MakoYass on MikkW's Shortform · 2021-06-08T01:33:22.156Z · LW · GW

but would then go on to use the phrase to refer to parts of masculinity which are not clearly problematic

I think this is usually is a disagreement about which parts of masculinity are problematic. Their position might be really ignorant and hateful, but I think it's sincere.

Comment by MakoYass on Mati_Roy's Shortform · 2021-06-07T06:49:13.401Z · LW · GW

Youtube lets you access your viewing history through your "library" (or in the web version, probably it's in the sidebar)

Comment by MakoYass on MikkW's Shortform · 2021-06-07T06:37:30.990Z · LW · GW

I wish I could figure out what factor divided people into these two language groups. For one there is toxic masculinity and there is non-toxic (or just ordinary) masculinity. For another, uttering "toxic masculinity" directly means "all masculinity is toxic". I do not know how they came apart.

Comment by MakoYass on Jemist's Shortform · 2021-06-07T06:25:45.890Z · LW · GW

You haven't really stated that she's putting all that much energy into this (implied, I guess), but I'd see nothing wrong with having a moral stance about literally everything but still prioritizing your activity in healthy ways, judging this, maybe even arguing vociferously for it, for about 10 minutes, before getting back to work and never thinking about it again.

Comment by MakoYass on AllAmericanBreakfast's Shortform · 2021-06-07T06:17:04.729Z · LW · GW

I don't like that one either, it usually reflects a lack of imagination. They're talking about the purposes we can think of now, they usually know nothing about the purposes we will find, once we have it, which haven't been invented yet.

Comment by MakoYass on MikkW's Shortform · 2021-06-07T06:12:51.131Z · LW · GW

Public funding seems especially easy to make truly democratic (proportionate to the needs of the voters, without majoritarian dynamics, additive), so it's weird to me that it took cryptocurrencies for it to start to happen.

Comment by MakoYass on MakoYass's Shortform · 2021-06-07T05:43:29.541Z · LW · GW

Noticing I've been operating under a bias where I notice existential risk precursors pretty easily (EG, biotech, advances in computing hardware), but I notice no precursors of existential safety. To me it is as if technologies that tend to do more good than harm, or at least, would improve our odds by their introduction, social or otherwise, do not exist. That can't be right, surely?...

When I think about what they might be... I find only cultural technologies, or political conditions: the strength of global governance, the clarity of global discourses, perhaps the existence of universities. But that can't be it. These are all low hanging fruit, things that already exist. Differential progress is about what could be made to exist.

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T23:40:35.119Z · LW · GW

The reason to call it "Hydra" is that the scaling solution works by "growing" "heads". It is very hydra-like in its behavior. It might have been named before the marketplace was a (visible) thing? (They may have been developing it for a while)

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T10:34:29.158Z · LW · GW

It can be argued that in many contracts, they actually wouldn't want use the native coin, because the unpredictable changes (or increases, even if it is always an increase) makes them unsuitable for most uses. For instance, say you'd made a bet with someone about something that's only going to resolve a year later. You want to know how much you're betting, but if you bet in a native coin, you really don't know how much a given quantity of that is going to be worth. The problem also comes up for contracts that use fines or collateral. That covers most contracts. 
So there are stable coins, that peg to the price of metal, or mirror the USD. I also came across a coin that multiplies or winnows in your wallet depending on how much its value changed over the course of a day so that it's always worth roughly one USD. I'm still not sure how to feel about that one.

But, ADA is mandatory for paying transaction fees, staking (which currently gets a return of 5% per annum), and voting in the governance processes. Generally, I'd guess that a lot of people will decide to trade in, or hold, ADA, just because converting would be mildly inconvenient.

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T10:12:13.238Z · LW · GW

And I cannot really stand the (probably good intended) paternalism

Finance is basically the least paternalistic way of helping people, pretty much everything they're doing leaves all of the decisions about how it will be used to Ethiopia, Ethiopian developers, and the end-users.

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T10:10:53.770Z · LW · GW

I don't see why doing this in a formal academic setting would be significantly better.

I don't know how to help you.

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T09:56:23.468Z · LW · GW

If it happens before cardano's smart contracts come online, my prediction is that cardano will only come back if it wins the scaling race (hydra vs eth sharding).

The thing is, it looks like eth pos wont come for a while. That, I think, is the crux. If we can develop more certainty about that claim, we'll know how to bet.

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T09:30:41.269Z · LW · GW

Good questions. (Aside from the one about Hydra. I don't think many potential investors are going to google hydra and then confuse a dark market for a scaling solution. I don't think many of them are going to google hydra in the first place and I think the ones who do will know the class of object they're looking for. An aside, they also named their development suite "Plutus", which another crypto project has tried to claim, but I've never heard of that project before and might never hear of it again and don't remember what it was.)

I wouldn't trust most people who say "Our approach is better", but Charles keeps generating plausible signals of actually having deep, impartial knowledge of every approach so I am inclined to trust this one. I'm not really sure if it's reasonable to expect to find a competent advocate of a crypto stack who is not deeply invested in its success, in fact, a lack of investment from an advocate should probably read as weak evidence of insincerity.

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T06:17:29.978Z · LW · GW

My stance on how long it's taken for them to deliver smart contracts depends on when they said they would deliver smart contracts. Are they long past a previously stated deadline? Or did they expect the preliminary formal work to take this long? If they expected it to take this long (or like, 2.5 years), and still decided to do the formal work, that would be a credible signal that they really believe it's that important and I would be moved by it. Otherwise, cause for concern.

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T06:09:46.389Z · LW · GW

Why would you need smart contracts for publishing? (rather than just file-sharing or a p2p web.) I can/have thought of mechanisms in that area, but I'm curious as to what you had in mind.

I agree with what you're saying, but that's still an abstract potential rather than a killer app.

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T02:41:17.230Z · LW · GW

Social recovery is presumably going to be optional, I can't really see a way they could make it non-optional. But I agree that it's probably impossible to design a system that would work for the sorts of people who would be betrayed in the worst possible way by a quorum of their closest friends and family.

Good approximate solutions to recurring problems are generally quite useful to have.

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T02:23:57.928Z · LW · GW

It's quite hard to make money investing if you can never develop enough confidence in your reasoning to sometimes disagree with the outside view. The outside view is already priced in.

I agree about Cardano being a good refuge for anyone fleeing foundational security issues.

Comment by MakoYass on We should probably buy ADA? · 2021-05-26T01:44:06.527Z · LW · GW

I have considered the outside view and once again it turns out that its position seems to be based on ignorance of inside information and thus isn't very interesting.

Comment by MakoYass on How might cryptocurrencies affect AGI timelines? · 2021-05-14T09:25:44.341Z · LW · GW

I should probably mention Ben Goertzel's SingularityNet, a marketplace for AI services that's being built on the Cardano platform.

Ben seems to think that this is the kind of environment in which AGI will arise, and that decentralizing it will help the odds of keeping the AGI aligned with the interests of its owners. This completely fails to connect with any of my intuitions about how AGI will be built, nor any of my intuitions about the alignment problem, but Ben has been into AGI for a very long time (He created the term "AGI", (with consultation from others)) (you can read MIRI's interview with him here, and it's good), so I would be willing to sit and listen to him for a long while.

Comment by MakoYass on What does the reaction to NFTs tell us about how people evaluate ecological damage? · 2021-05-14T08:29:49.642Z · LW · GW

The strength of the reaction is, I think, mostly due to its being situated among artist communities, who tend have a very strong, swift moral consensus formation process and a fairly strong voice. 

Artists see themselves as adepts in the plane of narrative, anthems, banners. Ethereum's power consumption is funded, primarily not by transaction fees from real commerce, but by speculation and the minting of mining rewards. These things only have force because a narrative has been constructed where the network has value. Artists are aware that their participation would be constructing a large portion of the value attributed to the ethereum network, far out of proportion with the costs of the transactions involved, they would be selling the network legitimacy and narrative force. The consequences of their actions would be very real.

I'm not sure that many people who propose this evaluation would support its inverse implication - that there are uses of fossil fuels to generate mains-grid electricity that are non-problematic and worth the environmental damage, given the option of renewables.

I think they'd mostly say that the sustenance of human lives under modernity (running hospitals, etc) is necessary and that the side effects of living normal lives (transport emissions, food production emissions, whatever ya gotta do to pay rent) is at least understandable and forgivable, while inventing this new category of emission is something very different.

The ones standing at the epicenter of the reaction do all know that there is a lighter alternative to Proof of Work, they know that it really is unnecessary, that most of this is all a consequence of running fast and breaking things and that there is yet little else to show for it.

They know about Proof of Stake, but you wont ever hear those people singing enthusiastically about Proof of Stake, because they have no enthusiasm for anything in the space. I think you're right about "Many people have soundly placed cryptocurrency within the "bad thing" box". When genuinely good applications start to emerge, these folks will be slow to notice, but I find that totally understandable: So far, despite all of the innovation and all of the investment, I'm not aware of a single application (other than remittance) as of early 2021, that's doing any material good for the world, I only see speculation, experimentation and foundation-laying, so far. I'm not saying there really aren't any good applications, it's noteworthy just to say that not a single one has found its way to me. Very soon I think some genuinely good things will start to emerge in the Cardano ecosystem, and although they are very real plans (banking the unbanked, building identity/credit score systems in the developing world), and I have complete faith that they'll come to fruition, they're still just plans, there isn't anything I could show to one who was angry about what has passed so far, that would calm them.

Comment by MakoYass on Investment is a useful societal mechanism for getting new things made. Stock trading shares some functionality with investment, but seems very very inefficient, at that? · 2021-05-04T02:00:11.212Z · LW · GW

Update: It's been proposed (at least, within IOHK) that a variant of NFTs be created that does this (proportion of profits from resale go back to the artist, or a charity designated by the artist). I think this makes a bit of sense for this scenario. Owners of a NFT want a sense that they fully own the thing, so "printing additional stock" (or selling NFTs as pools of stock that multiple people can buy) wouldn't work.

Feels like a very pre-quantitative mindset though.

On reflection, I think I have heard of "fractionalized NFTs" so uh, this gets quite blurry.

Comment by MakoYass on Are index funds still a good investment? · 2021-04-25T07:24:24.036Z · LW · GW

catalyze a massive shift in materials science innovation that could lead to fast AI takeoff

Have you considered not investing in those things, for that reason? As I understand it, accelerating AGI timelines would be the dumbest thing I could ever do. (Money isn't worth winning if it comes at the expense of imperiling my species (and can't then be used to proportionately de-emperil them))

(My understanding is that alignment work likely requires serial contributions from slow human theorists, can't really be accelerated very much with availability of better hardware. Better hardware moves the deadline back more than it speeds up the alignment theorists, it burns more time than it grants.

More powerful hardware is also more amenable to brute force methods, making it more likely that AGI will be realized with very opaque designs rather than meticulously crafted, explicit understandable designs that we might have been able to audit and verify.)

Comment by MakoYass on Let's Rename Ourselves The "Metacognitive Movement" · 2021-04-25T01:26:04.197Z · LW · GW

I'm not very worried about people remaining attached to the old term because nobody was ever attached to the old term.

I remember Eliezer saying he doesn't love the term and doesn't remember there ever being a decision to adopt it; most real ones put "aspiring" on the front, recognizing problems mentioned; a lot of living rationalist-adjacent communities have started calling themselves "post-rationalists" in explicit rejection of the term; and objectively speaking, most of the people in the world who flatly identify as "rationalists" haven't read the any yudkowsky at all (seems to be most popular among skeptics operating in very religious regions, increasingly rare in the west).

Comment by MakoYass on Let's Rename Ourselves The "Metacognitive Movement" · 2021-04-25T00:38:27.303Z · LW · GW

A love of knowledge? I have always had a terrible memory for all types of knowledge except metacognition. I only learned the age and scale of the universe in recent years for mostly spiritual reasons and I am still way way more interested in uncovering the meta-level of these things, the sorts of ages and scales that we can infer would be common for life-supporting laws-of-physics (the meta seems more directly relevant to anthropic problems).

Comment by MakoYass on Let's Rename Ourselves The "Metacognitive Movement" · 2021-04-25T00:27:29.174Z · LW · GW

I commit support.

If there is a difference between studying rationality and studying metacognition, our proclivity, if we're honest, was always first inclined towards studying metacognition, towards truth, principled, correct functionality, then to instrumental concerns as labor. If metacognition had not turned out to have instrumental uses, I would still have this itch to do it.

Similarly, if there exists any good philosophy that isn't just metacognition, I don't really know about it, I wouldn't know about it, I probably wouldn't find any of it interesting, it's not what I'm turning up for. All of the robust, high-return philosophy seems to be about thinking about thinking.

The philosophy channel of our ideology discord has been named "metacogning" for many months. Should a metacognition student be called a metacogner. Probably not. But it wouldn't be terrible.

Comment by MakoYass on Design thoughts for building a better kind of social space with many webs of trust · 2021-04-05T09:56:05.269Z · LW · GW

I came across the advice "assume that build might get called every frame" just today, and ah shit okay I might understand what's happening, it's doing the whole comment sorting algorithm each frame during transition animations (this doesn't explain laggy scrolling though). Incidentally I was just coding up another view that stows query results instead of regenerating them each time.

Why the hell is it doing this in page transition animations though. The layout of the widgets in the next page doesn't change during the animation and it would be a terrible transition animation if they did.

Comment by MakoYass on Design thoughts for building a better kind of social space with many webs of trust · 2021-04-02T00:31:06.380Z · LW · GW

This suggestion was really helpful btw, over the past couple of weeks I've been trying developing a mockup of tasteweb in Flutter.

I noticed you were the OP of a reddit thread asking for examples of flutter desktop apps. That thread was *also* helpful to me, lead me to try authpass's app, which performed extremely well on my linux box, informing me that actually flutter is pretty performant and the performance problems I'm having are unique to my project/build config. Ugh. Still don't know what to do. But at least I know it's not flutter itself now.
 

Even just scrolling is horrifically laggy.

Comment by MakoYass on Clubhouse · 2021-03-16T01:29:18.883Z · LW · GW

There was an invite chain proposed in Lesswrongers Slack, I don't know if it got running at the time but the comments are still there in #open

Comment by MakoYass on Deepmind has made a general inductor ("Making sense of sensory input") · 2021-02-09T04:02:37.763Z · LW · GW

Well I'm not sure there's any reason to think that we can tell, by looking at the mathematical idealizations, that the inductive parts will take about the same amount of work to create as the agentic parts, just because the formalisms seem to weigh similar amounts (and what does that seeming mean?). I'm not sure our intuitions about the weights of the components mean anything.

Comment by MakoYass on Deepmind has made a general inductor ("Making sense of sensory input") · 2021-02-04T19:30:45.502Z · LW · GW

Wondering whether Integrated Information theory dictates that most anthropic moments have internet access

Comment by MakoYass on Deepmind has made a general inductor ("Making sense of sensory input") · 2021-02-04T04:53:12.281Z · LW · GW

Hm, to clarify, by "consciously" I didn't mean experiential weight/anthropic measure, in this case I meant the behaviors generally associated with consciousness: metacognition, centralized narratization of thought, that stuff, which I seem to equate to deliberateness.. though maybe those things are only roughly equivalent in humans.

Comment by MakoYass on Deepmind has made a general inductor ("Making sense of sensory input") · 2021-02-02T18:32:17.295Z · LW · GW

I'm not aware of a technical definition of "general inductor". I meant that it's an inductor that is quite general.

Comment by MakoYass on MakoYass's Shortform · 2021-01-21T22:44:37.514Z · LW · GW

My opinion is that the St Petersberg game isn't paradoxical, it is very valuable, you should play it, it's counterintuitive to you because you can't actually imagine a quantity that comes in linear proportion to utility, you have never encountered one, none seems to exist.

Money, for instance, is definitely not linearly proportionate to utility, the more you get the less it's worth to you, and at its extremes, it can command no more resources than what the market offers, and if you get enough of it, the market will notice and it will all become valueless.

Every resource that exists has sub-linear utility returns in the extremes. 

(Hmm. What about land? Seems linear, to an extent)

Comment by MakoYass on The Best Virtual Worlds for "Hanging Out" · 2021-01-18T02:34:54.153Z · LW · GW

found a 3d hangout platform, might be worth a look https://www.q42.nl/en/work/mibo-app

Comment by MakoYass on A Scalable Urban Design and the Single Building City · 2021-01-10T03:34:46.905Z · LW · GW

Regarding artificial sunlight: a technology that imitates it shockingly well in many ways, giving a sense of a window to a light source with infinite distance: https://www.coelux.com/en/about-us/index

Comment by MakoYass on In software engineering, what are the upper limits of Language-Based Security? · 2020-12-28T05:16:35.581Z · LW · GW

but you sound exactly like the kind of person we want to attend

What, but I'm just a stray dog who makes video games about -... [remembers that I am making a game that centers around an esolang. Turns and looks at my BSc in formal languages and computability. Remembers all of the times a layperson has asked whether I know how to do Hacking and I answered "I'm not really interested in learning how to break things. I'm more interested in developing paradigms where things cannot be broken"]... oh.

uh. maybe.

Comment by MakoYass on In software engineering, what are the upper limits of Language-Based Security? · 2020-12-27T23:19:17.486Z · LW · GW

(If you think the question is too underspecified to answer, you probably shouldn't try to post an answer in the answers section. There is a comments section.)

(I'll try to work this into the question description)

Are you asking about which kinds of attacks can't be stopped by improving software?

That would be an interesting thing to see discussed, sure.

Or are you asking about the theoretical limits of PL technology?

No, that might be interesting from the perspective of.. what kinds of engineering robustness will exist at the limits of the singularity (this topic is difficult to motivate, but I hope the reader would agree that we should generally try to make forecasts about cosmically large events even when the practical reasons to do it are not obvious. It seems a-priori unlikely that questions of, say, what kinds of political arrangements are possible in a post-organic galaxy sized civilization wont turn out to be important in some way, even if we can't immediately see how.)

But I'm mainly wondering from a practical perspective. Programming languages are generally tools of craft, they are for getting things done in reality, even many of the most theoretical languages aspire to that. I'm asking mainly from a perspective of...

Can we get the engineers of this imperiled civilization to take their responsibilities more seriously, generally? When it's helpful to be able to prove that something will work reliably before we put it into production, can we make that easy to do? Can any of the tooling design principles from that be generalized to the AGI alignment problem?

With regards to Coq, will those languages actually be used in reality, why or why not, should promote them, should we should fund their development?

I'm interested in different timescales

  • the most security-promoting development processes that are currently in wide use.
  • the most security-promoting development processes that are possible with recently developed technology.
  • processes that could be developed now.
  • processes that could come to exist 10 years away; processes that might exist 30-50 years from now.
  • perhaps some impossibility theorems that may bind even the creatures of the singularity.